Comments on: Sasquatch & Saucershttp://cryptomundo.com/bigfoot/sasquatch-saucers/
for Bigfoot, Lake Monsters, Sea Serpents and MoreSat, 01 Aug 2015 06:00:17 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.3By: NMRNGhttp://cryptomundo.com/bigfoot/sasquatch-saucers/comment-page-1/#comment-92327
Wed, 25 Sep 2013 04:03:04 +0000http://cryptomundo.com/?p=69993#comment-92327Seriously, have none of you ever seen the Men in Black movies? Clearly, what is happening here is that Solaxiant 9 is using Earth as a penal colony and whenever you spot a UFO, it’s simply dropping off some 7-9′ tall, hairy convicts. Sheesh, I thought there’d be someone here who understands how the galaxy works….

Really? Some of you need to spend ten or so paragraphs discussing this? Bigfoot (may very well be real) + UFOs (definitely real, but who knows what portion are just hyper-secret experimental USAF craft?) = quackery. End of discussion.

]]>By: Lyall Mhttp://cryptomundo.com/bigfoot/sasquatch-saucers/comment-page-1/#comment-92239
Fri, 20 Sep 2013 20:57:49 +0000http://cryptomundo.com/?p=69993#comment-92239DWA and others you should read the actual accounts put forward in Gordon’s book because there is a concerted action between the UFO’s and the Bigfoot’s in the observations they are definitely not “just happened to be in the same location.” Elvis is piloting the UFO and the greys have decided to deal with only a real leader of the world, Vladimir Putin.

Kidding aside, I hate to say it but that connection made back in the 1970’s between Bigfoot and UFO’s has stuck with the scientific community to today. They don’t take it seriously and it will take somebody bringing in a body to prove existence.

Thank you, Alamo for putting in the links concerning Edwards AFB. DWA should like that at least the USAF thinks that there isn’t a connection there between the two.

Are the Big Guys piloting the craft? Climbing on board? Asking for an audience with Obama? As I said and will say again:

If you see a ‘possum and a bright light, does it make the ‘possum an alien?

We aren’t ignoring anything. We are politely pointing out that when thousands of people are seeing an animal….acting like an animal…leaving all the different kinds of sign an animal leaves….and the witness had no doubt it was an animal…the kind of ignoring that’s going on is only exacerbated by stuff like this.

Scientists, like it or not, are driven away from potential research subjects that they find questionable in the first place when the signal-to-noise ratio gets too unfavorable.

And this, like it or not, goes into the denominator. Science can’t prove it until Plan 9 From Outer Space presents itself to them…so what are they to do with this?

“woo woo.” Two syllables. Makes them comfortable.

Like it or not.

We could have a million of these.

Suggest search protocols and somebody’ll get right on it. Promise. (?)

DWA:
You also say: “It’s the automatic presumption that there is an integral, rather than coincidental, connection between sasquatch and saucers that some of us have the problem with.”

I don’t have an automatic presumption. My conclusion is based on the large body of data of a distinctly high-strangeness nature that is connected to Bigfoot. Like it or not, most Bigfoot researchers have come across weird cases from time to time that push things down more of a Fortean path. If those same researchers choose to deny the data or the witness testimony, so be it.

Arewethereyeti?:
You say: “You can call me close-minded.”

Nope, but I do think it’s a pity that in a field that criticizes the skeptics for ignoring data, the community sometimes does likewise.

You also say: “you cannot use one unknown to explain another.”

I’m not explaining anything, I’m pointing out the geographical and time connection between two unusual phenomena, something that – as Stan and Rob note – occurs time and again. I don’t claim to explain anything on this matter, simply because it’s a deeply weird issue. But ignoring it, or refusing to read a book where the witnesses are named, and you could then contact them yourself, well…

Seems like there was some assumption by the military brass that the two could be connected… though they are not some of the most imaginative people around and it could simply be a case of the two being sighted in the same general area.

]]>By: AreWeThereYetihttp://cryptomundo.com/bigfoot/sasquatch-saucers/comment-page-1/#comment-92211
Thu, 19 Sep 2013 15:05:22 +0000http://cryptomundo.com/?p=69993#comment-92211@ Nick Redfern: Honestly? You can call me close-minded (and probably will!) but I have little interest in supporting authors who publish such drivel; I also don’t spend good money on books that claim faeries and unicorns exist. But back to my point: simply put, you cannot use one unknown to explain another – not if you want anyone to take you seriously.

People have seen “spook lights” in the forest and various un-ID’d lights in the sky above. People have also reported Bigfoot in the woods. A (very) small percentage claim to have seen both in the same neck of the woods. However, to posit that the two are related (short of clear photos/video of Bigfoot either entering or leaving an alien craft)is simply inferring a connection and “proves” nothing.

OK, rather than continue rattling-on, please see DWA and PhotoExpert’s replies which, as usual, have more eloquently expressed what I am clumsily attempting to get across.

]]>By: DWAhttp://cryptomundo.com/bigfoot/sasquatch-saucers/comment-page-1/#comment-92210
Thu, 19 Sep 2013 14:52:27 +0000http://cryptomundo.com/?p=69993#comment-92210And I also had something to say about this.

“There’s a new Lair of the Beasts article at Mania.com that is guaranteed to raise the blood-pressure of Sasquatch-seekers everywhere.”

Was that, um, the point?

Maybe the point was a poke at people who make unreserved fun of UFOsquatch, when maybe the thing to do is leave well enough alone.

But I don’t think the point of scientific endeavor should be to raise blood pressure. Lower it, now maybe.

And it’s not that you didn’t observe something that science might actually not be able to explain at this point.

It’s the automatic presumption that there is an integral, rather than coincidental, connection between sasquatch and saucers that some of us have the problem with, particularly as both are unexplained, and it’s therefore presumptuous to use either to “explain” the other.

But this is the problem for me. I consider eyewitness reports as evidence. Any good slueth must consider eyewitness testimony as evidence. And the validity of that evidence should be predicated on the credibility of the witness. If the witness were an emotionally unstable drunk who forgot their eyeglasses that day, well, that makes the evidence questionable. If the witness was educated, familiar with the outdoors, had great eyesight like a pilot, and of impeccable character, then that would be credible eyewitness testimony. Bu that is just one problem for me.

The other problem is when observers try to correlate two unkown phenomenon. Sasquatch has not yet been proven to even exist. Secondly, UFOs are unidentified flying objects. That does not mean that when an unidentified flying object is spotted that it is nonterrestrial or from another planet. Let’s say the witness was of average credibility and weather conditions were good. As we all know, if you are in the woods, it is dark and difficult to see detail. For the sake of argument, let’s say what the witness saw was a bear but mistook the bear for a Bigfoot. And at the same time, the government was testing a new type of drone, the likes of which have not been seen by the public. Well, the witness would report a Bigfoot with a UFO in the same location at the same time. But we know in this example, even though the witness was credible, he was mistaken. His mind naturally filled in things as an explanation for what he could not explain. See the problem here?

In my second example, for the sake of argument, let’s say the witness had a bona fida Sasquatch sighting, but the unidentified flying object was actually a remote controlled flying saucer that some kids were having fun with while camping. Although the Sasquatch sighting might be considered authentic, the UFO sighting was not. Yet the witness put the two together as fact in their sighting report. So in reality, it was only a Bigfoot sighting. See the problem there?

In my last example, let’s say the witness was credible but definitely a city dweller. He mistakes a bear as a Bigfoot but actually sees an unidentified flying object that is not of earth technology. He really does see an alien UFO but the Bigfoot was actually a bear. He reports that the Bigfoot was spotted along with a UFO. He may have been correct about the UFO but was wrong about the bear being a Bigfoot. Again, the two things together, Bigfoot and UFO do not match up although they might have been reported that way.

Could there actually be true Bigfoot sightings and UFOs at the same time. Yes, that possibility exists. I believe the percentage of that actually happening would be a rarity. And if you factor in that both Bigfoot and UFOs from another planet existing, that would be statistically significant but not in favor of that happening. It would be statistically significant that it is not a probability. Add human error to that and the odds of a real alien UFO appearing with a Bigfoot are infinitesimal. Possible yes, but highly improbable!

So for me, it is more likely than not, that most of these reports are wrong or in error. Given that neither Bigfoot or alien UFOs have been proven, I do not take much credence in these reports. Fun to think about but really, this falls more into the realm of fantasy for me. Now prove Bigfoot exists or alien UFO exists, then perhaps a Bigfoot and UFO might be seen together by a credible witness and some type of correlation can be made. Until that happens, I would be more apt to throw out the baby with the bathwater in almost every case.

Still interesting and fun to think about though. But so are unicorns!

]]>By: Bechohttp://cryptomundo.com/bigfoot/sasquatch-saucers/comment-page-1/#comment-92197
Wed, 18 Sep 2013 21:54:57 +0000http://cryptomundo.com/?p=69993#comment-92197I find the connection unlikely. However, early on in an investigation of a clan we found in Washington state we put a wildlife camera up. At the time we didn’t know it wouldn’t do us any good. : )))) Anyway, a series of pictures that were taken in the middle of the night over a twenty two minute period showed a light shining down from above at different angles. It was as if something were hovering over the camera and trying to figure out what it was. We know it wasn’t a helicopter because the branches of the trees didn’t show a down draft from a helicopter. There was a wind blowing from the south and that is what was triggering the camera. The branches only showed the wind from the south and didn’t change when the angle of the beam changed. That was weird.
]]>